Welch v Secura Insurance Company; (COA-UNP, 4/6/1994; RB #1709)


Michigan Court of Appeals; Docket No. 145014; Unpublished 
Judges Jansen, McDonald, and Hocking; ________; Per Curiam 
Official Michigan Reporter Citation:  Not Applicable; Link to Opinion alt    

Work Loss Benefits: Nature of the Benefit [§3107(1)(b)]

Evidentiary Issues    

In this unpublished per curiam Opinion, the Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's denial of plaintiff s motion for a judgment notwithstanding the verdict, new trial, or additur, in this case for first party benefits. 

The plaintiff apparently was claiming entitlement to no-fault work loss benefits. The Court of Appeals held that there existed a legitimate question of fact regarding whether plaintiff suffered a closed head injury resulting in loss of income from employment, and that the verdict in this regard was supported by the evidence. The court also found no abuse of discretion in the trial court's admission of certain testimony of physicians and evidence revealing the existence of an unrelated lawsuit that plaintiff had filed against his employer, presumably for a wage claim. Finally, the trial court held that plaintiff was entitled to statutory interest on any allowable expense claim that was not timely paid by defendant